Syllabus: Conservation, environmental pollution and degradation, environmental impact assessment.
Context: Union Environment Minister Bhupender Yadav chaired NTCA’s 28th meeting at Sundarbans Tiger Reserve, reviewing Project Cheetah expansion and strategies to address human-wildlife conflict.
What is Human–Animal Conflict?
- Human–animal conflict arises when human activities intersect with wildlife habitats, causing harm to both.
- Common triggers include agricultural expansion, infrastructure development, urbanisation, and resource extraction.
- Outcomes involve loss of human life, wildlife mortality, livelihood damage, and ecological imbalance.
Implications of Human–Animal Conflict
- Economic losses occur due to crop destruction, livestock killing, and property damage.
- Human safety risks increase from attacks by elephants, tigers, bears, and other wild animals.
- Ecological disruption follows retaliatory killings, altering predator–prey population balance.
- Conservation challenges emerge as negative public perception weakens wildlife protection efforts.
- Psychological impacts include fear, trauma, and long-term anxiety among affected communities.
Why Treat HAC as a State-Specific Disaster?
- Current management remains limited under the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972.
- Disaster classification enables rapid response, stronger authority, and coordinated administration.
- It shifts focus from conservation-only frameworks to human safety and relief-centric governance.
Current Management vs Proposed Disaster Framework
- Responsibility lies with Forest Department; proposed shift to State Disaster Management Authority.
- Decision-making moves from Chief Wildlife Warden to Chief Minister–led authority.
- District Collector gains role as Chairperson of District Disaster Management Authority.
- Intervention powers expand under Disaster Management Act, 2005.
- Judicial scrutiny reduces; only High Courts or Supreme Court can entertain suits.
- Section 71 bars lower courts from interference in disaster-related actions.
- Section 72 grants overriding powers over other laws during declared disaster periods.
Data on Human–Wildlife Conflict
- Tigers killed 125 humans between 2019–2021.
- 329 tigers died due to poaching and natural or unnatural causes.
- Elephants killed 1,579 humans in three years.
- 307 elephants died due to poaching, electrocution, poisoning, and train accidents.
Advisories and State-Level Initiatives
- Gram Panchayats empowered to manage problematic wildlife under WPA, 1972.
- Interim ex-gratia relief mandated within 24 hours of incidents.
- Uttar Pradesh listed man–animal conflict under State Disaster Response Fund.
- Uttarakhand adopted bio-fencing using plant species.
- Odisha used seed ball techniques to enhance forest food availability.
Mitigation Strategies
- Habitat restoration through corridors, protected areas, and sustainable land-use planning.
- Crop protection measures like fencing, scare devices, and diversification.
- Early warning systems to alert communities about wildlife movement.
- Community engagement and education for coexistence and conflict awareness.
- Rapid response mechanisms including helplines and wildlife conflict response teams.
Government Measures Supporting HAC Management
- Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 ensures habitat protection and hunting prohibition.
- Biological Diversity Act, 2002 aligns conservation with international biodiversity commitments.
- National Wildlife Action Plan (2002–2016) strengthens protected areas and endangered species conservation.
- Project Tiger (1973) and Project Elephant (1992) protect key species and corridors.
- National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) integrates mitigation into development planning.
Conclusion
- Declaring human–animal conflict a state-specific disaster enhances administrative efficiency.
- Disaster management framework ensures timely relief, stronger authority, and reduced litigation delays.
- A balanced approach combining conservation and human safety is essential for sustainable coexistence.